In many modern workplaces, the employer-employee relationship subtly mirrors a parent-child dynamic. This “infantilisation” of employees—where individuals are treated as if they lack the autonomy, maturity, or capability to make responsible decisions – stems from rigid control structures and hierarchical systems embedded in corporate cultures. While these mechanisms may have originated as a way to ensure consistency and manage risk, they now often work against both employee potential and business outcomes.
How Control and Hierarchy Create a Pseudo-Parent-Child Dynamic
Corporate hierarchies are designed to maintain order through layers of approval, surveillance, and micromanagement. In theory, these structures ensure accountability. In practice, they diminish trust and reinforce a dynamic where employees are viewed as dependents requiring oversight.
Consider the following examples:
Excessive Permission-Seeking: Many organisations require employees to obtain approval for even minor decisions – whether it’s taking a day off, purchasing office supplies, or experimenting with new ideas. This undermines their ability to act independently and fosters a learned helplessness that drains resources and undermines culture.
Micromanagement: Managers who control how, when, and where tasks are completed often strip employees of the opportunity to exercise judgment or take ownership. Over time, employees stop thinking critically and wait for direction – just as a child waits for parental guidance. In turn, managers become overwhelmed by the struggle of managing a ‘disengaged’ team.
Overbearing Conflict Management Processes: Instead of allowing employees to resolve minor disagreements through sensible adult debate and discussion, many companies intervene with ‘conflict management’ solutions. This creates a system where employees are discouraged from developing their own conflict resolution skills, and instead rely on external intervention for even the most trivial disputes. The process is often so formalized and time-consuming that it prevents employees from simply moving forward, whilst simultaneously wasting valuable time and resources.
This pseudo-parent-child relationship may provide leaders with a comforting sense of control, but it comes at a steep price.
The Business Cost of Infantilisation
By treating employees as if they cannot be trusted to operate with autonomy, businesses create systems that demand constant oversight. These systems are not only costly but also counterproductive. As researcher Dan Pink highlights, when businesses suppress autonomy through control systems, they actively undermine intrinsic motivators – leading to disengagement and underperformance.
Here are the primary challenges infantilisation creates:
Reduced Innovation and Problem-Solving: Employees who must seek permission for every decision are less likely to take initiative or suggest creative solutions. They fear reprimand if they deviate from the prescribed path.
Increased Administrative Burden: Managing control-heavy systems requires extensive resources. Approvals, documentation, and layers of oversight demand time and money—resources that could be better spent on innovation etc.
Low Engagement and Retention: Employees who feel disempowered are more likely to disengage and ultimately leave. Gallup consistently finds that employees who are given autonomy and trust are more committed and productive.
Missed Opportunities: When decision-making is centralized, businesses lose the advantage of on-the-ground insights. Employees closest to the work are best positioned to spot inefficiencies and opportunities – if they are empowered to act.
This approach is the corporate equivalent of “cutting your nose to spite your face” – building systems that are not only expensive to maintain but actively prevent employees from delivering their best work.
In her book The Corporate Kindergarten, Szilvia Olah explores how corporate environments often infantilise employees, stripping them of autonomy and independent thought. Olah’s work provides a compelling argument for why this dynamic is not only demoralising but also fundamentally ineffective. For leaders looking to understand and dismantle these counterproductive systems, her book is an essential read.
Imagining the Alternative: Empowered Workplaces That Align with Human Instincts
What if we designed workplaces to align with natural human needs – ambition, independence, belonging, and mastery – rather than against them? Businesses that reject the infantilisation model and instead foster autonomy and trust create a radically different culture.
In these environments:
Decisions Are Decentralized: Employees are trusted to make decisions within clear guidelines. Instead of endless approval chains, there are frameworks for responsible autonomy.
Outcomes Matter More Than Processes: Rather than dictating how work should be done, leaders focus on outcomes and impact, allowing employees the freedom to determine the best approach.
Feedback is Continuous and Collaborative: Employees receive regular, real-time feedback that is developmental rather than punitive. This replaces the outdated annual performance review model.
Flexibility Is the Norm: Employees have control over when and how they work, which supports both productivity and wellbeing.
Trust Is a Default Position: Employees are assumed to be capable and responsible adults unless proven otherwise – not the other way around.
The boldest companies are already embracing these changes. Global organisations like Atlassian, GitLab, and Spotify have shifted to trust-based models that emphasise autonomy and flexibility. These companies consistently outperform their more traditional peers in both employee satisfaction and business outcomes.
For Leaders and Decision-Makers: Rethinking Control Systems
If you have the power to shape organisational structures, consider these shifts:
Audit Control Mechanisms: Identify areas where control systems add cost without enhancing value. Challenge whether processes are truly necessary.
Trust by Default: Adopt a “trust first” culture. Assume employees are competent until proven otherwise, rather than designing systems based on the lowest common denominator.
Redesign Performance Metrics: Move beyond KPIs that measure compliance. Focus instead on business outcomes and employee growth.
Empower Middle Management: Equip managers to act as coaches who support autonomy rather than as enforcers of top-down mandates.
Pilot New Models: Start small. Test new ways of working in one team or department before scaling them across the organisation.
Leaders who have the courage to challenge the status quo will not only unlock the full potential of their workforce but also drive stronger business outcomes for years to come.